Global top 100 university - CCS Technology across the Capture … · 2015. 11. 6. · LR ET Collegium presentation: “CCS technology across Capture / Transport / Storage chain”

1

CCS Technology across the Capture / Transport / Storage Chain

by

Dr Magnus Melin

The LRET Research CollegiumSouthampton, 11 July – 2 September 2011

“CCS Technology across Capture / Transport / Storage chain”

Magnus MelinLloyd’s Register

July 12, 2011

LR ET Collegium presentation: “CCS technology across Capture / Transport / Storage chain”

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)

Illustrations: The Bellona Foundation and IEA


CAPTURE


Sources of CO2

• The heaviest CO2 emitters are mainly fossil-fuel fired power plants.

• Other large emitters include steel, cement and refineries.

• CCS is generally considered feasible for large point sources that emit more than 100,000 tonnes CO2/year

• Globally, there are around 8,000 plants emitting above this level and in total these sources emit approximately 50% of the global man-made CO2

emissions

• A ”typical” coal plant of 800 MWe emits in the order of 3-4 million tonnes CO2 per year


Sources of CO2 – some food for thought

IEA ”CO2 emissions from fuel combustion – highlights”. 2008.

”See the world as it is – not as you would wish it to be”

Jack Welch – former CEO and Chairman of GE

Note: different definitions provide different message !!!


59 planned projects

Capture technology

• Three main technologies; post-combustion, pre-combustion and oxy-fuel

• Technology is well-understood but remains to be demonstrated at full-scale. Approximately 70-80 demo projects worldwide.

Global CCS Institute

(June 2011)11 active projects


Post-combustion capture method

• CO2 is captured from flue gas using chemical cleaning utilizing an absorbent, for example amine, that attracts CO2.

Image source: Vattenfall / www.kjell-design.com


Post-combustion capture method

• Approximately 80-90% of the CO2 can be captured

• Pros (+)

• Well-proven technology

• Can be fitted to existing power plants

• Cons(-)

• High energy consumption, primarily caused by the heat required for regeneration of the absorbent


Pre-combustion capture method

• CO2 is removed from the fuel prior to combustion using a steam reformer that converts the fuel to hydrogen (H2) and carbon monoxide (CO). The CO-gas and steam is then converted into H2 and CO2. Finally, the H2 and CO2 gas is separated in the same way as in post combustion



Pre-combustion capture method

• Precombustion technology is linked to “IGCC” technology (Integrated coal Gasification Combined Cycle), where coal is converted into CO2

and H2 before combustion.

• Pros (+)

• CO2 captured on fuel flow (limited volume) and not on flue gas

• Study indicates that pre-combustion applied to IGCC plant is most financially attractive solution for new power plant (with CCS)

• Cons(-)

• Can only be applied to new power plants

• High capital costs

• Less developed and tested compared to post-combustion

• Technical challenges with operating gas turbines on hydrogen


Oxy-fuel combustion capture method

• A traditional fossil fuel power plant is operated by combusting fuel and air. Oxy-fuel combustion uses oxygen instead of air. This is very advantageous when it comes to CO2 capture, as the flue gas is mainly composed of steam and CO2, which can be very easily separated.



Oxy-fuel combustion capture method

• 100% of the CO2 can be captured

• Pros (+)

• Easy to capture CO2

• 100% of the CO2 can be captured

• Cons(-)

• Production of pure oxygen is expensive

• Less developed and tested compared to post-combustion


TRANSPORT


Pipeline and/or ship

• Two main alternatives: pipeline and/or ship

• > 30 years experience in North America of CO2 pipelines (>6,000 km in U.S.)

• Pipeline option

+ simple

+ large capacity

+ economical (especially onshore)

- long lead-time, less flexibility

• Ship option

+ flexibility

+ economical (long distances)

+ quick mobilisation

- irregular supply

- cost for liquefaction, loading, unloading, pressurisation Illustration: Anthony Veder


Transportation by ship

18 barg-40 degC1,240 m3 CO212.5 kn79 m

Tank pressure

Tank temp.Tank capacity

SpeedLOA

• CO2 is transported in liquid phase close to triple point (-56.5 degC, 5.2 barA)

• Liquefaction necessary

• Similar to todays LPG carriers

• A handful of ships transport CO2

currently, primarily small quantities for the food industry

• Example: ”Coral Carbonic”, Anthony Veder

Phase diagram for CO2


Conversion of existing LPG ships

• The LPG market is well developed with >1,000 LPG tankers in traffic

• Semi-refrigerated type with capacity 5,000-20,000 m3 seems to be most feasible for conversion

• Possibility for conversion depends on many factors and it is likely that only a small portion of all existing LPG carriers are suitable

• Necessary modifications would as a minimum include modified pumps and discharge arrangements. Depending on offshore unloading scheme additional equipment might be necessary (DP, compression to injection pressure, heater etc)

• Further detailed analysis needed

max 6 bargTank pressure

minimum -104 degCTank temp.

6,500 m3 CO2Tank capacity

16 knSpeed

115 mLOA


New ships for CO2 transport

• New design concepts published (DSME, Maersk, TGE, Anthony Veder ...)

• Many concepts similar to existing LPG carriers using cylindrical or bi-lobe type tanks.

• Dual-type LPG/CO2 designs published by several ship builders

• Alternative concepts include DSME’s very large CO2 carrier using 100 vertical tube-shaped tanks and TGE’s barge container concept

• Tank capacity 10,000-100,000 m3 CO2 (near triple point; -56.5 degC, 5.2 barA)

• Example of designs for offshore unloading and processing are ”Floating Storage and Injection Units” (FSIU) and “Floating Liquefaction Storage and Offloading” (FLSO)

• Lead time for new CO2 carrier in the order of 2-3 years


Design concepts for CO2 ships

Maersk Tankers / HHI

TGE DSME

TGE


Logistical challenges with CO2 ship transport

• Ship-based solution requires detailed study to ensure proper logistics

• Distance, loading- and unloading time, weather, injection capacity, buffer capacity, compression, weather ...

CCS feasibility study by LR. Download report: http://www.lr-ods.com/News-and-Events/CCS_study.html


Offloading CO2 offshore from ship

• Unloading CO2 offshore is challenging

• Offshore

• Conditioning of CO2 (pressure/temperature/flow rate)

• Connectivity with receiving equipment / well

• Injection rate limited by well and not ship in most cases

• Overall supply / demand must match

• Various concepts have been put forward


CO2 transport using pipeline

> 30 years experience in North America of onshore CO2 pipelines

>6,000 km in U.S.


CO2 transport using pipeline

• CO2 is transported in compressed state (dense) at ambient temperature


Design considerations for CO2 pipeline

• CO2 pipelines are similar to natural gas pipelines but there are important differences:

- higher pressure, different chemical properties

• Design and operational experience cannot directly be extended to CO2 pipelines

• Water content and other impurities have large effect on CO2 behaviour

• Corrosion

• Hydrate formation

• Rupture of pipe - dispersion of CO2


Example of CO2 incidents

IndustryIndustryIndustryIndustry

� Leak from fire suppressant system: 107 intoxicated,19 hospitalised, no fatalities – Monchengladbach, Germany 2008

� CO2 tank (30 Tonnes) BLEVE: 3 fatalities, 8 further injuries – Worms, Germany 1988

� Oil well release of 81% CO2 (with H2S): 2,500 people evacuated -Nagylengyel, Hungary 1998

GeologicalGeologicalGeologicalGeological

� Lake Nyos, Cameroon, 1986 –1,700 fatalities, 1,600 kT release

� Dieng volcano, Indonesia –1979, 142 killed, 200 kT release


Clusters of CO2 sources


Pipeline cluster options


CO2 transport by pipeline in Longannet project


Challenges with CO2 transport using pipeline

Examples:

• Public perception (safety)

• Complex properties of CO2 and effect of impurities/water

• Large scale integration of pipeline network (cross-national)

• Financials

• Regulations including financial liability


STORAGE


Requirements on CO2 storage sites

• Accomodate large volumes of CO2

• Safe for very long time scales

• Financially feasible

• Allow required monitoring (of potential CO2 leakage) and hand-over from operator to ”competent authority” (member state in EU)


Storage options

Source: IPCC Special report on CCS


Project example – offshore storage

• Example on active projects include Utsira (illustrated) and Snøhvidt. Both capture CO2 from natural gas

• Utsira storage in saline formation at approximately 1 km depth

• About 1 million tonnes of CO2 has been stored in the Utsira formation annually since 1996 without any indication of leakage.


Trapping mechanisms

ca. 10-100 years ca. 1,000-10,000 years


Is it safe?

People in favour of CO2 storage say YES because:

• Current storage sites do not leak

• The likelyhood of leakage is very low

• We can simulate and monitor how the CO2 will behave underground

• Even if it leaks, say 1% in 500 years, this should be compared to current situation (100% ”leakage” immediately at 100% probability)

• There will be rigorous regulation of the storage sites

People sceptical about CO2 storage say NO because:

• Our knowledge and tools are not developed enough

• The time scales are very long

• Things always go wrong sooner or later


Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) using CO2

• Large scale injection of CO2 for Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) has been done for more than 30 years in North America

• Lot of experience onshore but not yet proven commercially feasible offshore

How does it work?

Let’s have a look...


Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) using CO2

Example from Denver onshore field in Texas:


EOR using CO2 : relevance to CCS

CO2 for EOR is increasingly seen as a potentially favourable option to help growing the CCS industry. Some of the reasons for this are:

1. Injection of CO2 in oil reservoirs mobilizes additional oil, thereby offsetting some of the costs with demonstrating CCS.

2. Several oil fields in the North Sea are near end of commercial field life. CO2 EOR would in most cases unlock additional reserves to potentially delay abandonment. This would in turn enhance the security of supply which is valuable for many reasons.

3. An EOR project is regarded as a CO2 storage site and receives ETS credits for the stored CO2.


CONCLUDING REMARKS


Concluding remarks CCS

• All aspects of CCS have been proven to work technically but further work remains to demonstrate feasibility at commercial scale

• Work is being done to progress with the ambition to have large demo projects go live by 2015 and start of commercial scale projects by 2020

• Billion € funding available from governments and EU

• Challenges to overcome for large-scale deployment:

- Regulatory uncertainty

- Cost, cost, cost

- Significant financial risk from large

investments and long return period

- Public perception (safety)

IEA roadmap for expansion of CCS

Services are provided by members of the Lloyd's Register Group. For further information visit www.lr.org/entities

For more information, please contact:

Magnus MelinGlobal Thermal Power Leader

Lloyd’s Register Energy

T +46 8 55 60 99 62

E [email protected] www.lr.org

Documents

Global top 100 university - CCS Technology across the Capture … · 2015. 11. 6. · LR ET Collegium presentation: “CCS technology across Capture / Transport / Storage chain”